no one can see past the 2 words "battle" and "ship". battleship is simply the largest class in a navy, they think it implys much more then that. navy terms arent a perfect fit to these ships though, because on top of their military element they are built to serve any non combat function you could imagine.
Actually, I saw past "battle" and "ship", that's where I saw Galaxy and Nebula.
I would call it a capital ship, which is a large naval vessel that is heavily armed (so it cuts large freighters out, but allows 20th century carriers to be included). BTW, Flagships are considered capital ships.
Actually, I saw past "battle" and "ship", that's where I saw Galaxy and Nebula.
I would call it a capital ship, which is a large naval vessel that is heavily armed (so it cuts large freighters out, but allows 20th century carriers to be included). BTW, Flagships are considered capital ships.
capital ship, sure that fits and doesn't imply the same way battleship does.
Isnt this ship like 100 yrs old in this Universe? Shouldn't it be a common Freighter Style ship like the Reliant was in TNG? I mean . . . I miss the Enterprise A, but it doesnt mean Im gonna get a version with 45K hull and hanger pets . . .
Isnt this ship like 100 yrs old in this Universe? Shouldn't it be a common Freighter Style ship like the Reliant was in TNG? I mean . . . I miss the Enterprise A, but it doesnt mean Im gonna get a version with 45K hull and hanger pets . . .
Just sayin.
Nope, it's some 40-50 years old by now, which is half of it's intended lifespan - and that's talking about the first of them.
There are newer Galaxies than the initial 6 ones and there's no reason for the class to not be still in production due to it's size and modular nature.
no that is the excelsior the galaxy is at most 53 years old as the USS Galaxy was launched in 2356 but the mass majority of them where built during the dominion war so on average the galaxy is only 33 years old as most of them where built in the 2370's. the Enterpise-D if still in service was the second galaxy class launched and would only be 46 as it was launched in 2363
Isnt this ship like 100 yrs old in this Universe? Shouldn't it be a common Freighter Style ship like the Reliant was in TNG? I mean . . . I miss the Enterprise A, but it doesnt mean Im gonna get a version with 45K hull and hanger pets . . .
Just sayin.
are you speaking about the exelsior or tos connie, or of the galaxy?
because indeed the 2 firts ship shouldn't be at tier 5, yet the exelsior is....just like the ambassador.
do you known that the ambassador is the succesor of the exelsior?
do you known that the galaxy is the succesor of the ambassador?
yeah, it been almost 4 eternitys that i am enduring this ship now, so i known... the future lasts a long time:)
I understand your point, but regardless, one might argue that STO is in its "maturity" phase of the product life cycle, and this is where things change to evolve the product to re-invigorate growth, or gradually move into the "decline" phase.
are you speaking about the exelsior or tos connie, or of the galaxy?
because indeed the 2 firts ship shouldn't be at tier 5, yet the exelsior is....just like the ambassador.
do you known that the ambassador is the succesor of the exelsior?
do you known that the galaxy is the succesor of the ambassador?
don't known, just saying.
Actually, depending on where you look, the Ambassador replaces the Excelsior as the "front-line" cruiser role, the Excelsior then moves down to a "workhorse" status, and then the Akira replaces Excelsior in that role.
Also, don't forget to mention that the Sovereign replaces the Galaxy in the "front-line" status too. The Galaxy herself is no spring chicken either. Nor is the Sovereign. The "front-line" cruisers are the Odyssey and Avenger (in their respective roles).
Honestly I find the galaxy class to be one of the uglier and most over rated ships around (in terms of looks). That being said I don't see why the ship is in such a drastic need of a revamp. I have seen many of the preform just fine in both pve and pvp so I'm just going to assume it is because the ship doesn't have 5 tact consoles, and 5 forward weapons and a turn rate of 24, a shield modifier of 1.5 and a total hull hp of a borg tactical cube is the reason why so many people wine and complain about it.
Honestly I find the galaxy class to be one of the uglier and most over rated ships around (in terms of looks). That being said I don't see why the ship is in such a drastic need of a revamp. I have seen many of the preform just fine in both pve and pvp so I'm just going to assume it is because the ship doesn't have 5 tact consoles, and 5 forward weapons and a turn rate of 24, a shield modifier of 1.5 and a total hull hp of a borg tactical cube is the reason why so many people wine and complain about it.
Well, the thread is quite long to read as a whole, but you could at least ask someone to explain the need and type of revamp that is considered to be needed before you chime in.
If you're going to 'assume' and than make a post based on faulty assumptions you might as well not post a reply at all.
gmarcq for a decent run down of why the exploration cruiser is in such a bad way with the way the game is layed out search for dontdrunkimshoot's posts he has explained it pretty well in the past of why it is lacking compared to other T5 cruisers
Actually, depending on where you look, the Ambassador replaces the Excelsior as the "front-line" cruiser role, the Excelsior then moves down to a "workhorse" status, and then the Akira replaces Excelsior in that role.
Also, don't forget to mention that the Sovereign replaces the Galaxy in the "front-line" status too. The Galaxy herself is no spring chicken either. Nor is the Sovereign. The "front-line" cruisers are the Odyssey and Avenger (in their respective roles).
the ambassador was a quantum leap over the exclecior in every way, it moved the goal posts, it did not fit in any established position. the galaxy class then did the same thing to the ambassador. the excelsior wouldn't get downgraded immediately, the ambassador would just open up new exploration possibility, at first.
soverign didn't do anything that abrupt, its a ship less then half its size that came stock with equipment less then a decade more advanced. equipment that was added to the starfleet parts bins and would find its way on everything else in a few years. as a true explorer its an inferior platform, its more of a closer to home protect the federation large cruiser.
something like the odyssey would be the next quantum leap. the avengers existence makes more sense with the odyssey around. its like the galaxy and sovereign relation ship, only much more pronounced. 1 is the explorer, the other is the tactical ship.
So, my Fleet Exploration Cruiser couldn't pull Donatra's aggro away from an Andorian Escort, despite having six points in Threat Control, three [+Th] Mark XI Science consoles, the Advanced Fleet Positron Deflector with the [Threat] modifier, and the Attract Fire command active. This same ship clocks in at 7,500 DPS in ISE and 11,500 DPS against the Tactical Cube in KASE. I'm getting close to this point, and if I can't tear aggro away from a goddamned Kumari when I get there, I'm going to have some choice words for Mr. Al Rivera.
capital ship, sure that fits and doesn't imply the same way battleship does.
Either this or why don't we call it an "Explorer"? That's Star Trek's term and I feel like it would be appropriate if we talk from a in-canon perspective. Sure, much more people can't get over the fact that Starfleet is not the US space navy but that's pretty much their problem
Actually, depending on where you look, the Ambassador replaces the Excelsior as the "front-line" cruiser role, the Excelsior then moves down to a "workhorse" status, and then the Akira replaces Excelsior in that role.
Also, don't forget to mention that the Sovereign replaces the Galaxy in the "front-line" status too. The Galaxy herself is no spring chicken either. Nor is the Sovereign. The "front-line" cruisers are the Odyssey and Avenger (in their respective roles).
According to the design documents on the Sovereign class, Rick Sternbach stated that the Sovi is the replacement for the Excelsior and he classified her as a heavy cruiser. It replaced the Enterprise-D bearing the name "Enterprise" though classification wise I think it is more likely that the Sovereign is intended to streamline the ship line-up and eventually substitute the entire heavy cruiser legacy (replacing Ambassador, Akira, (Cheyenne) and Excelsior ships) that most likely was decimated after the war and was designed mostly to patrol and protect federation space amongst other things, thus the more tactical approach of packing equal firepower on a more manneuvreable frame.
But I agree that the Oddyssey and the Avenger probably now share the same relationship, though STOs lore doesn't make any sense. According to the game, starfleet designs and produces new types of ships constantly as if they were trying to win a contest
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
are you speaking about the exelsior or tos connie, or of the galaxy?
because indeed the 2 firts ship shouldn't be at tier 5, yet the exelsior is....just like the ambassador.
do you known that the ambassador is the succesor of the exelsior?
do you known that the galaxy is the succesor of the ambassador?
don't known, just saying.
Nothing against you or really anyone else but say its the others successor is right and wrong. I mean in the fact that yea as far as the films and the movies are it was the NX, the Constitution, the Constitution 2, the Excelsior, the Ambassador, the Galaxy, the Sovereign, and now Odyssey. Those ships replaced the others as the owners of the name Enterprise. But honestly they didnt replace the line of ships being built. Just cause they started making Ambassadors doesn't mean they stop producing excelsior's did they. I really think to many think of this as these ships replaced those when it was just a ship of that class being decommissioned or destroyed and the next line of ships getting the name Enterprise.
Honestly its not really about whether the Galaxy in the show deserves to be more powerful (or more useful really is what most want) in game, or when it was commsioned and how old it is compared to other ships, its about it being a ship that able to do as well as all other cruisers in End game and STF's.
Actually, depending on where you look, the Ambassador replaces the Excelsior as the "front-line" cruiser role, the Excelsior then moves down to a "workhorse" status, and then the Akira replaces Excelsior in that role.
Also, don't forget to mention that the Sovereign replaces the Galaxy in the "front-line" status too. The Galaxy herself is no spring chicken either. Nor is the Sovereign. The "front-line" cruisers are the Odyssey and Avenger (in their respective roles).
i didn't meant it in a specific role.
some said that the sovereign isn't the succesor of the galaxy but of the exelsior, from a "role" point of view.
i meant it more from a general point of view like first came the tos then the exelsior, ambassador, galaxy and sovereign.
in the generally admit idea that newer is better, nor that i bielieve that newer is automatically better or that the sovereign is the direct succesor of the galaxy and that the ambassador is the one of the exelsior.
Honestly I find the galaxy class to be one of the uglier and most over rated ships around (in terms of looks). That being said I don't see why the ship is in such a drastic need of a revamp. I have seen many of the preform just fine in both pve and pvp so I'm just going to assume it is because the ship doesn't have 5 tact consoles, and 5 forward weapons and a turn rate of 24, a shield modifier of 1.5 and a total hull hp of a borg tactical cube is the reason why so many people wine and complain about it.
maybe if you try it you would anderstand, instead of assuming.
maybe if you have read a little bit about the tread you would have the big picture.
I have seen many of the preform just fine in both pve and pvp
here, by making that kind of statement you automatically discredit yourself.
no serious pvper will claim that a galaxy can do fine in pvp.
go to the OPVP channel in game, you will see, when we want to laught ( or cry, depend on the person ) we speak about the galaxy.
seeing as you evaluate things i am sure that a tier 2 connie can also do fine both in pve and pvp in your eyes
So, my Fleet Exploration Cruiser couldn't pull Donatra's aggro away from an Andorian Escort, despite having six points in Threat Control, three [+Th] Mark XI Science consoles, the Advanced Fleet Positron Deflector with the [Threat] modifier, and the Attract Fire command active. This same ship clocks in at 7,500 DPS in ISE and 11,500 DPS against the Tactical Cube in KASE. I'm getting close to this point, and if I can't tear aggro away from a goddamned Kumari when I get there, I'm going to have some choice words for Mr. Al Rivera.
So, my Fleet Exploration Cruiser couldn't pull Donatra's aggro away from an Andorian Escort, despite having six points in Threat Control, three [+Th] Mark XI Science consoles, the Advanced Fleet Positron Deflector with the [Threat] modifier, and the Attract Fire command active. This same ship clocks in at 7,500 DPS in ISE and 11,500 DPS against the Tactical Cube in KASE. I'm getting close to this point, and if I can't tear aggro away from a goddamned Kumari when I get there, I'm going to have some choice words for Mr. Al Rivera.
Interesting setup. I only wish I had enough time to grind for the Romulan beams. As it stands, I don't even have enough free time to log in anymore. :S
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
the ambassador was a quantum leap over the exclecior in every way, it moved the goal posts, it did not fit in any established position. the galaxy class then did the same thing to the ambassador. the excelsior wouldn't get downgraded immediately, the ambassador would just open up new exploration possibility, at first.
soverign didn't do anything that abrupt, its a ship less then half its size that came stock with equipment less then a decade more advanced. equipment that was added to the starfleet parts bins and would find its way on everything else in a few years. as a true explorer its an inferior platform, its more of a closer to home protect the federation large cruiser.
something like the odyssey would be the next quantum leap. the avengers existence makes more sense with the odyssey around. its like the galaxy and sovereign relation ship, only much more pronounced. 1 is the explorer, the other is the tactical ship.
I never talked about quantum leaps. I was talking more about the newest ships of the line. Each of the "Enterprise" ships was the front-liner upon its introduction phase, and the predecessor hit its maturity phase. The Akira is the odd-ball, designed to fill the shoes of a not front-liner in the Excelsior.
i didn't meant it in a specific role.
some said that the sovereign isn't the succesor of the galaxy but of the exelsior, from a "role" point of view.
i meant it more from a general point of view like first came the tos then the exelsior, ambassador, galaxy and sovereign.
in the generally admit idea that newer is better, nor that i bielieve that newer is automatically better or that the sovereign is the direct succesor of the galaxy and that the ambassador is the one of the exelsior.
Only problem with that was that the Akira was designed to replace the Excelsior.
Either this or why don't we call it an "Explorer"? That's Star Trek's term and I feel like it would be appropriate if we talk from a in-canon perspective. Sure, much more people can't get over the fact that Starfleet is not the US space navy but that's pretty much their problem
The Galaxy class is both an "explorer" and a "capital ship". Captial ships encompass the different kind of larger ships in a fleet, typically heavy cruisers and up. Battleships, aircraft carriers and others are also capital ships, but each have different roles.
So, my Fleet Exploration Cruiser couldn't pull Donatra's aggro away from an Andorian Escort, despite having six points in Threat Control, three [+Th] Mark XI Science consoles, the Advanced Fleet Positron Deflector with the [Threat] modifier, and the Attract Fire command active. This same ship clocks in at 7,500 DPS in ISE and 11,500 DPS against the Tactical Cube in KASE. I'm getting close to this point, and if I can't tear aggro away from a goddamned Kumari when I get there, I'm going to have some choice words for Mr. Al Rivera.
Isn't plasma still one of the weakest procs in game?
I never talked about quantum leaps. I was talking more about the newest ships of the line. Each of the "Enterprise" ships was the front-liner upon its introduction phase, and the predecessor hit its maturity phase. The Akira is the odd-ball, designed to fill the shoes of a not front-liner in the Excelsior.
i used that word to illustrate that theres a big difference between a the excelsior and ambassador, and the ambassador and galaxy, but theres not such a big difference between the galaxy and the sovereign. mostly because theres just a tiny age gap between them, but also the first example of the progression getting smaller and not bigger. for these reasons the sovereign doesn't look like a successor to the galaxy at all, but a successor to old smaller ships.
Only problem with that was that the Akira was designed to replace the Excelsior.
no i dont think so. the akira is an actual battle cruiser, so much so that they think its an escort in game. a bunch or torp launchers in the pod, and several on the main body, even pointing at the sides. its main phaser array is even longer then the sovereign's longest. this was not intended to replace a general purpose work horse, it was designed to be the front line star fleet cruiser, proboly because the federation has been at war so often, even several at once, since the 2350s. the norway, steamrunner, intrepid, and sovereign all are there to take over everything the excelsior was handling and more. those are all fairly general purpose, and super modern.
Comments
Actually, I saw past "battle" and "ship", that's where I saw Galaxy and Nebula.
I would call it a capital ship, which is a large naval vessel that is heavily armed (so it cuts large freighters out, but allows 20th century carriers to be included). BTW, Flagships are considered capital ships.
capital ship, sure that fits and doesn't imply the same way battleship does.
Just sayin.
Nope, it's some 40-50 years old by now, which is half of it's intended lifespan - and that's talking about the first of them.
There are newer Galaxies than the initial 6 ones and there's no reason for the class to not be still in production due to it's size and modular nature.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Galaxy_class
yeah, it been almost 4 eternitys that i am enduring this ship now, so i known... the future lasts a long time:)
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
i don't known about the stretch of your... but on mine it certainly could:D
more seriously tho, one daesn't need to be uber to be good.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
are you speaking about the exelsior or tos connie, or of the galaxy?
because indeed the 2 firts ship shouldn't be at tier 5, yet the exelsior is....just like the ambassador.
do you known that the ambassador is the succesor of the exelsior?
do you known that the galaxy is the succesor of the ambassador?
don't known, just saying.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Agreed, the difference between many people is the ships placement on the "good-to-uber chart".
I understand your point, but regardless, one might argue that STO is in its "maturity" phase of the product life cycle, and this is where things change to evolve the product to re-invigorate growth, or gradually move into the "decline" phase.
http://www.nku.edu/~issues/internet_marketing/newwebpage1.html
Actually, depending on where you look, the Ambassador replaces the Excelsior as the "front-line" cruiser role, the Excelsior then moves down to a "workhorse" status, and then the Akira replaces Excelsior in that role.
Also, don't forget to mention that the Sovereign replaces the Galaxy in the "front-line" status too. The Galaxy herself is no spring chicken either. Nor is the Sovereign. The "front-line" cruisers are the Odyssey and Avenger (in their respective roles).
Well, the thread is quite long to read as a whole, but you could at least ask someone to explain the need and type of revamp that is considered to be needed before you chime in.
If you're going to 'assume' and than make a post based on faulty assumptions you might as well not post a reply at all.
the ambassador was a quantum leap over the exclecior in every way, it moved the goal posts, it did not fit in any established position. the galaxy class then did the same thing to the ambassador. the excelsior wouldn't get downgraded immediately, the ambassador would just open up new exploration possibility, at first.
soverign didn't do anything that abrupt, its a ship less then half its size that came stock with equipment less then a decade more advanced. equipment that was added to the starfleet parts bins and would find its way on everything else in a few years. as a true explorer its an inferior platform, its more of a closer to home protect the federation large cruiser.
something like the odyssey would be the next quantum leap. the avengers existence makes more sense with the odyssey around. its like the galaxy and sovereign relation ship, only much more pronounced. 1 is the explorer, the other is the tactical ship.
Either this or why don't we call it an "Explorer"? That's Star Trek's term and I feel like it would be appropriate if we talk from a in-canon perspective. Sure, much more people can't get over the fact that Starfleet is not the US space navy but that's pretty much their problem
According to the design documents on the Sovereign class, Rick Sternbach stated that the Sovi is the replacement for the Excelsior and he classified her as a heavy cruiser. It replaced the Enterprise-D bearing the name "Enterprise" though classification wise I think it is more likely that the Sovereign is intended to streamline the ship line-up and eventually substitute the entire heavy cruiser legacy (replacing Ambassador, Akira, (Cheyenne) and Excelsior ships) that most likely was decimated after the war and was designed mostly to patrol and protect federation space amongst other things, thus the more tactical approach of packing equal firepower on a more manneuvreable frame.
But I agree that the Oddyssey and the Avenger probably now share the same relationship, though STOs lore doesn't make any sense. According to the game, starfleet designs and produces new types of ships constantly as if they were trying to win a contest
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Nothing against you or really anyone else but say its the others successor is right and wrong. I mean in the fact that yea as far as the films and the movies are it was the NX, the Constitution, the Constitution 2, the Excelsior, the Ambassador, the Galaxy, the Sovereign, and now Odyssey. Those ships replaced the others as the owners of the name Enterprise. But honestly they didnt replace the line of ships being built. Just cause they started making Ambassadors doesn't mean they stop producing excelsior's did they. I really think to many think of this as these ships replaced those when it was just a ship of that class being decommissioned or destroyed and the next line of ships getting the name Enterprise.
Honestly its not really about whether the Galaxy in the show deserves to be more powerful (or more useful really is what most want) in game, or when it was commsioned and how old it is compared to other ships, its about it being a ship that able to do as well as all other cruisers in End game and STF's.
http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/35002799/aview/_BURHCzQ_Wk___KGrHgoH_D8EjlLl_cYWBKMosyosSQ___1.JPG
http://news.toyark.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2012/12/Star-Trek-Enterprise-NCC-1701-D-All-Good-Things-Version-010_1355774500.jpg
i didn't meant it in a specific role.
some said that the sovereign isn't the succesor of the galaxy but of the exelsior, from a "role" point of view.
i meant it more from a general point of view like first came the tos then the exelsior, ambassador, galaxy and sovereign.
in the generally admit idea that newer is better, nor that i bielieve that newer is automatically better or that the sovereign is the direct succesor of the galaxy and that the ambassador is the one of the exelsior.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
maybe if you try it you would anderstand, instead of assuming.
maybe if you have read a little bit about the tread you would have the big picture.
here, by making that kind of statement you automatically discredit yourself.
no serious pvper will claim that a galaxy can do fine in pvp.
go to the OPVP channel in game, you will see, when we want to laught ( or cry, depend on the person ) we speak about the galaxy.
seeing as you evaluate things i am sure that a tier 2 connie can also do fine both in pve and pvp in your eyes
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
hehehe, yes indeed!
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
if that is true you may have a point here
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Interesting setup. I only wish I had enough time to grind for the Romulan beams. As it stands, I don't even have enough free time to log in anymore. :S
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I never talked about quantum leaps. I was talking more about the newest ships of the line. Each of the "Enterprise" ships was the front-liner upon its introduction phase, and the predecessor hit its maturity phase. The Akira is the odd-ball, designed to fill the shoes of a not front-liner in the Excelsior.
Only problem with that was that the Akira was designed to replace the Excelsior.
The Galaxy class is both an "explorer" and a "capital ship". Captial ships encompass the different kind of larger ships in a fleet, typically heavy cruisers and up. Battleships, aircraft carriers and others are also capital ships, but each have different roles.
Isn't plasma still one of the weakest procs in game?
What do a bunch of model kits have to do with Cryptic?
i used that word to illustrate that theres a big difference between a the excelsior and ambassador, and the ambassador and galaxy, but theres not such a big difference between the galaxy and the sovereign. mostly because theres just a tiny age gap between them, but also the first example of the progression getting smaller and not bigger. for these reasons the sovereign doesn't look like a successor to the galaxy at all, but a successor to old smaller ships.
no i dont think so. the akira is an actual battle cruiser, so much so that they think its an escort in game. a bunch or torp launchers in the pod, and several on the main body, even pointing at the sides. its main phaser array is even longer then the sovereign's longest. this was not intended to replace a general purpose work horse, it was designed to be the front line star fleet cruiser, proboly because the federation has been at war so often, even several at once, since the 2350s. the norway, steamrunner, intrepid, and sovereign all are there to take over everything the excelsior was handling and more. those are all fairly general purpose, and super modern.